[ExI] simulation as an improvement over reality.

[Mike Dougherty]

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 11:44 AM, Eugen Leitl <eugen at leitl.org> wrote:
> On Sat, Jan 01, 2011 at 08:31:27AM -0800, Samantha Atkins wrote:
>
>> Why drag soul into this?  A perfect copy is not the original.
>> That is what this unending discussion seems to sum up to.  OK.  Fine.  Next.
>
> A perfect copy is indistinguishable from the original. Location is not
> a label encoded within the copy, orelse it would be distinguishable.
>
> See, it's easy.

Sure, a perfect copy... But we can only asymptotically approach a
perfect copy.  If we can accept that fact then we should discuss what
constitutes a "good enough" copy.  In most cases I assume good enough
is able to fool everyone that I need the copy to fool.  So early on,
I'll have a copy that's good enough to fool SPAM; then I'll have a
copy that's good enough to fool you-all on this discussion list that
I'm me despite the fact that I'm a copy of me; then I won't even have
to show up at obligatory family get-togethers because the copy will
fool everyone except me.  Clearly I'm always ME, so the impersonator
must necessarily be the damned copy.  Of course, the copy will feel
the same way about me/us.  (after all, we think alike)